[WSG] Mary-Anne Nayler is out of the office. [SEC=No Protective Marking Present]
I will be out of the office starting 06/05/2008 and will not return until 14/05/2008. I will respond to your message when I return. For anything urgent, please email Web Site. Australian Organ Donor Register - Sign on to save lives. Go online or call 1800 777 203. NOTICE - This message is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action based upon it. If you received this message in error please notify Medicare Australia immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Medicare Australia. *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Full flash websites
because users like Sven disable it by default No disrespect to Sven but that must be the pits to take the very long learning curve: Create the Flash: Then along comes 'A Visitor' and disable all your hard work..*doh Kate http://jungaling.com/bichons/ http://jungaling.com/Malaysia/ http://simplyborneo.com/gardenforums/ http://jungaling.com/katesplace/ - Original Message - From: Sam Sherlock To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 1:13 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Full flash websites As many have already commented I apply caution when using flash (because of it creates extra work, because users like Sven disable it by default and much more besides) The thing is some clients care initially more for the visual appeal (things bouncing around etc) of websites and not for features that improve the accessibility or user experience overall. others have made points about ensuring content is available to all. In a lot of cases it is possible to display the same content in a no flash format (server side scripting helps a great deal - not writing script srcs or codeblocks to the page [setting this in a user setting session var]) I make use of swfObject to replace a summary of the content that the swf displays, often with links to further info of the extent of work produced by this can mushroom, and become unwieldy. admittedly this is much easier if the site is not full browser flash, but if the site is small and all the content is loaded in dynamically Flash can recreate (often poorly) things that are achieved with traditional html - deep linking And this is then an aspect of the site that must be cared for, increasing the overall complexity (and therefore potential err) - there if a lot to bear in mind here also there is shadowbox (by Michael Jackson [not the former jackson 5 pop sensation]) that does a real nice job in displaying all kinds of content lightbox (lokesh dhakar) style of the page - this is what Ben Buchanan was refering to I think - http://mjijackson.com/shadowbox/index.html - S 2008/5/6 Ben Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: What do you people, professionals and hobby standardists think about full flash websites?? where is the usability and accessibility for flash in general?? Accessibility and search engine visibility of Flash in most cases is zero. I've only heard of one Flash site that was considered accessible and it made a lot of news at the time! Flash only reliably works for users with no physical or technical barriers; and search engines can't read Flash in any useful manner. I generally don't like the usability aspects either - that's subjective I guess, but I've found Flash is generally used when someone thought HTML didn't make them look cool enough. Which means they wanted lots of stuff to bounce and flash and so on ;) Essentially you should only ever add a Flash layer over the top of XHTML; and give users the choice between the two. Flash isn't evil, but *only offering Flash* is evil. -ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1415 - Release Date: 05/05/2008 06:01 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Colour accessibility/ usability
Hi all, I would just like to thank all those who have shared their experiences. There has been some very interesting feedback that has been mentioned and we are hoping to conduct a few tests and see how users feel with the colour scheme. I've used the colour contrast analyser before, and it does help a lot (although it does say and red and white are acceptable - but that's where automated tools can sometimes cause false positives). Thanks! Regards, Linda On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 12:08 AM, Likely, James A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Linda, You mentioned that you need research to back up some decisions. How about taking the mock-ups that you have done already and just go to a coffee shop. Just ask some one to take a look at the site and give them 5-10 seconds. See what there first thoughts are for the site and what did they see. We have used this in the past and seemed to be pretty effective. James From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ROBEY,Jane Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 11:39 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Colour accessibility/ usability Well, apart from what has already been said, I have a personal experience of being on the receiving end of a Red brand. I bank with HSBC, who in Australia have Red and Grey as their brand colours. Every month I get a statement in Red print and every month I think I am in debt or they are writing to warn me about something that is overdue. Except this month. I have changed bank. Regards Jane *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Full flash websites
yup, but then I take the point of view that web pages are created to communicate with your audience. If people like me are part of your audience, flash is pretty much unsuitable. That doesn't mean there aren't audiences for whom flash is the right answer, just that thought and analysis are needed to make sure your communication medium is appropriate to both your message and your audience. No different really from writing your web content in Latin :} sven kate wrote: because users like Sven disable it by default No disrespect to Sven but that must be the pits to take the very long learning curve: Create the Flash: Then along comes 'A Visitor' and disable all your hard work..*doh Kate http://jungaling.com/bichons/ http://jungaling.com/Malaysia/ http://simplyborneo.com/gardenforums/ http://jungaling.com/katesplace/ - Original Message - *From:* Sam Sherlock mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org mailto:wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Sent:* Tuesday, May 06, 2008 1:13 AM *Subject:* Re: [WSG] Full flash websites As many have already commented I apply caution when using flash (because of it creates extra work, because users like Sven disable it by default and much more besides) The thing is some clients care initially more for the visual appeal (things bouncing around etc) of websites and not for features that improve the accessibility or user experience overall. others have made points about ensuring content is available to all. In a lot of cases it is possible to display the same content in a no flash format (server side scripting helps a great deal - not writing script srcs or codeblocks to the page [setting this in a user setting session var]) I make use of swfObject to replace a summary of the content that the swf displays, often with links to further info of the extent of work produced by this can mushroom, and become unwieldy. admittedly this is much easier if the site is not full browser flash, but if the site is small and all the content is loaded in dynamically Flash can recreate (often poorly) things that are achieved with traditional html - deep linking And this is then an aspect of the site that must be cared for, increasing the overall complexity (and therefore potential err) - there if a lot to bear in mind here also there is shadowbox (by Michael Jackson [not the former jackson 5 pop sensation]) that does a real nice job in displaying all kinds of content lightbox (lokesh dhakar) style of the page - this is what Ben Buchanan was refering to I think - http://mjijackson.com/shadowbox/index.html - S 2008/5/6 Ben Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: What do you people, professionals and hobby standardists think about full flash websites?? where is the usability and accessibility for flash in general?? Accessibility and search engine visibility of Flash in most cases is zero. I've only heard of one Flash site that was considered accessible and it made a lot of news at the time! Flash only reliably works for users with no physical or technical barriers; and search engines can't read Flash in any useful manner. I generally don't like the usability aspects either - that's subjective I guess, but I've found Flash is generally used when someone thought HTML didn't make them look cool enough. Which means they wanted lots of stuff to bounce and flash and so on ;) Essentially you should only ever add a Flash layer over the top of XHTML; and give users the choice between the two. Flash isn't evil, but *only offering Flash* is evil. -ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1415 - Release Date: 05/05/2008 06:01 ***
[WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
Hi all,
Here's an odd one I can't seem to solve. I had to style all input
fields in a form with a black background, white text. Rather than give
them a class, I've just given all inputs this styling
EG: input {background:#000; color:#FFF;}
My issue is that the submit buttons now have this styling also in
certain browsers. I'd like to give them a class and set them back to
their original look, but background:none; doesn't work. Is there a way
of doing this does anyone know?
I am aware that I could give every field a class and add the black
background to that, but I'd like to do it the other way around and
only have a class for the buttons, less classy!
Any ideas?
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My issue is that the submit buttons now have this styling also in certain browsers. I'd like to give them a class and set them back to their original look, but background:none; doesn't work. Is there a way of doing this does anyone know? Not quite what you asked, but have you considered using the button element for your submit button instead of an input? Removes this kind of annoyance. -- - Matthew *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
Hi Paul,
You could put them in two separate containers/divs and give the one
containing the form elements you want to style an id.
Doesn't have to be a div though. You could use a list, or anything else that
is containing the form inputs you want to style.
For example:
div id=cont1
input /
input /
input /
/div
input submit /
Then use:
#cont1 input {background:#000; color:#FFF;}
That way the submit button wont be affected.
Darren Lovelock
Munky Online Web Design
http://www.munkyonline.co.uk
T: +44 (0)20-8816-8893
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Paul Collins
Sent: 06 May 2008 13:52
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
Hi all,
Here's an odd one I can't seem to solve. I had to style all input fields in
a form with a black background, white text. Rather than give them a class,
I've just given all inputs this styling
EG: input {background:#000; color:#FFF;}
My issue is that the submit buttons now have this styling also in certain
browsers. I'd like to give them a class and set them back to their original
look, but background:none; doesn't work. Is there a way of doing this does
anyone know?
I am aware that I could give every field a class and add the black
background to that, but I'd like to do it the other way around and only have
a class for the buttons, less classy!
Any ideas?
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
Or, instead of using a class to reset the layout to original, why not set a class for the elements you actually are styling? When I use use INPUT elements I allways add a class related to what kind of input element it is and only refer to the class in the CSS. Recently I've started to use attribute selectors instead as it'll simply fall back to default UI elements if the UA doesn't support it. I'm not sure if you will be able to reset a form element to use the OS UI once you've assigned. -Thom From: Matthew Pennell Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 3:00 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My issue is that the submit buttons now have this styling also in certain browsers. I'd like to give them a class and set them back to their original look, but background:none; doesn't work. Is there a way of doing this does anyone know? Not quite what you asked, but have you considered using the button element for your submit button instead of an input? Removes this kind of annoyance. -- - Matthew *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
The style background:none is in reference to the background-image
property, which is why it doesn't work.
background:transparent seems to be the most likely candidate as this relates
to the background-color property but there doesn't seem to be a
background:default setting which would be very useful for your case.
I know it's not brilliant, but perhaps you should apply the stylings the
other way around, leave the general inputs unstyled and apply the class to
all other elements. Either that or style the submit buttons yourself with a
custom background image.
Steve
Steve Workman
*PA* Consulting Group
123 Buckingham Palace Road
London SW1W 9SR
United Kingdom
Direct dial: +44 207 881 3732
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*www.paconsulting.com* http://mail.google.com/mail/www.paconsulting.com
On 06/05/2008, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Here's an odd one I can't seem to solve. I had to style all input
fields in a form with a black background, white text. Rather than give
them a class, I've just given all inputs this styling
EG: input {background:#000; color:#FFF;}
My issue is that the submit buttons now have this styling also in
certain browsers. I'd like to give them a class and set them back to
their original look, but background:none; doesn't work. Is there a way
of doing this does anyone know?
I am aware that I could give every field a class and add the black
background to that, but I'd like to do it the other way around and
only have a class for the buttons, less classy!
Any ideas?
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
You can use CSS selectors:
input[type=text],input[type=password],input[type=checkbox],input[type=radio]
{background:#000; color:#FFF;}
But this doesn't work in IE6...
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Matthew Pennell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
My issue is that the submit buttons now have this styling also in
certain browsers. I'd like to give them a class and set them back to
their original look, but background:none; doesn't work. Is there a way
of doing this does anyone know?
Not quite what you asked, but have you considered using the button
element for your submit button instead of an input? Removes this kind of
annoyance.
--
- Matthew
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
--
Samuel Santos
http://www.samaxes.com/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
Paul Go have a look at http://nickcowie.com/presentation/s5-button.html it should show what you can and can't style on input type submit (particularly safari/camino), and what you can do with the button element. Note it is a couple of years old and I don't use the button element at the moment. Waiting for XHTML-MP 1.2 to get into common use. 2008/5/6 Matthew Pennell [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My issue is that the submit buttons now have this styling also in certain browsers. I'd like to give them a class and set them back to their original look, but background:none; doesn't work. Is there a way of doing this does anyone know? Not quite what you asked, but have you considered using the button element for your submit button instead of an input? Removes this kind of annoyance. -- - Matthew *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Nick Cowie http://nickcowie.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] :: CSS Code Formatting ::
Hi, I was reading this article on Smashing Magazine which shows how to increase code readability, http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/05/02/improving-code-readability-with-css-styleguides/ but I have listened to Andy Clarke over Lynda.com saying that one should save the white space as it increases the file size. Which approach is better? Should we go for code readability as described by Smashing Magazine or follow what Andy said. Thanks, Amrinder Freelance Web-Standard Designer www.awayback.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] :: CSS Code Formatting ::
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Amrinder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which approach is better? Should we go for code readability as described by Smashing Magazine or follow what Andy said. Why not do both? Use a coding style that suits you, then compress it for live deployment. -- - Matthew *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] :: CSS Code Formatting ::
Amrinder wrote: I was reading this article on Smashing Magazine which shows how to increase code readability but I have listened to Andy Clarke ... saying that one should save the white space as it increases the file size. Which approach is better? Should we go for code readability as described by Smashing Magazine or follow what Andy said. Do you have enough page views that your bandwidth cost is killing you? Will removing a couple of dozen tab characters in your style sheet result in a better user experience? If so, pull the white space. Personally, I'd worry more about the ease of maintenance, especially if more than one person's working on the site. :-) Or have the best of both: formatted for readability in your version control repository, with a script to run at deploy time to check the markup+css out and minimize it. FWIW, -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-621-3445 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
Thanks for taking the time to reply everyone. Much appreciated.
Not quite what you asked, but have you considered using the button element
for your submit button instead of an input? Removes this kind of annoyance.
Yes, I did forget about that one. However though, I'm stuck in this
.NET vortex and I don't have much control over field elements.
You could put them in two separate containers/divs and give the one
containing the form elements you want to style an id.
Doesn't have to be a div though. You could use a list, or anything else that
is containing the form inputs you want to style.
I think you're right Darren. I can just add an ID to the fieldset. Makes sense.
You can use CSS selectors:
input[type=text],input[type=password],input[type=checkbox],input[type=radio]
{background:#000; color:#FFF;}
But this doesn't work in IE6...
Thanks Samuel. I am already using them actually, IE6 is the one
browser that's causing the problem :) No surprise there of course!
Cheers and thanks for your help.
2008/5/6 Nick Cowie [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Paul
Go have a look at http://nickcowie.com/presentation/s5-button.html
it should show what you can and can't style on input type submit
(particularly safari/camino), and what you can do with the button element.
Note it is a couple of years old and I don't use the button element at the
moment. Waiting for XHTML-MP 1.2 to get into common use.
2008/5/6 Matthew Pennell [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
My issue is that the submit buttons now have this styling also in
certain browsers. I'd like to give them a class and set them back to
their original look, but background:none; doesn't work. Is there a way
of doing this does anyone know?
Not quite what you asked, but have you considered using the button
element for your submit button instead of an input? Removes this kind of
annoyance.
--
- Matthew
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
--
Nick Cowie
http://nickcowie.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] :: CSS Code Formatting ::
Ultimately you want to use one version during your development process (to ensure readability between your development team) but then have a smaller/compacted version to be used once you deploy to the live server (and at which point it's not the end of the world if your CSS is difficult to read) A best of both worlds approach ;- - Original Message From: Amrinder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WebStandards Discussion Lish wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 May, 2008 2:49:24 PM Subject: [WSG] :: CSS Code Formatting :: Which approach is better? Should we go for code readability as described by Smashing Magazine or follow what Andy said. __ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. A Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven Workman Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 6:19 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS The style background:none is in reference to the background-image property, which is why it doesn't work. background:transparent seems to be the most likely candidate as this relates to the background-color property but there doesn't seem to be a background:default setting which would be very useful for your case. I'd say background:none and background:transparent are the same, because shorthand default to using initial values: background-image: none background-color: transparent -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] :: CSS Code Formatting ::
From Yslow http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/ Reduce the number of css files used Link to them in the top of the page, no inline styles Gzip and reduce the whitespace when going to production. These are fairly simple steps for the average web developer. Visit yslow for more performance tips. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ross Bruniges Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 4:31 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] :: CSS Code Formatting :: Ultimately you want to use one version during your development process (to ensure readability between your development team) but then have a smaller/compacted version to be used once you deploy to the live server (and at which point it's not the end of the world if your CSS is difficult to read) A best of both worlds approach ;- - Original Message From: Amrinder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WebStandards Discussion Lish wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 May, 2008 2:49:24 PM Subject: [WSG] :: CSS Code Formatting :: Which approach is better? Should we go for code readability as described by Smashing Magazine or follow what Andy said. _ Sent from Yahoo! Mail http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mailuk/taglines/isp/control/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/e vt=52418/*http:/uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html . A Smarter Email. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Opera Dragonfly released
Hi, I hope this isn't too off topic, but I thought you'd be interested to know that Opera launched Opera Dragonfly today - our new developer tools. This release is an early alpha to show the direction we are moving with our developer tools. This initial version will include a JavaScript Debugger, a DOM Inspector, CSS Inspector, Error Console and a Command Line. An upcoming version will also support editing of CSS/DOM/JavaScript, a single window mode and XHR/HTTP Headers inspection. The first of these updates should come in alpha 2 in a few weeks. Opera Dragonfly is built using Web technologies (XML, CSS and JavaScript) and will auto-update when a new version is released. We hope these will come out at a fairly rapid pace to begin with. The application will run in a persistent cache, so that it is accessible when offline, and so that it doesn't have to communicate with the Opera server, except when it updates. Opera Dragonfly will support all browsers that include the Core-2.1 rendering engine (except Opera Mini). This currently includes Opera 9.5 beta 2 and the forthcoming Opera Mobile 9.5 release. A proxy exists that allows Opera Dragonfly on the desktop to communicate with Opera on supported mobiles and devices. This makes debugging on devices easier as you can use a regular keyboard, mouse and monitor. To start Opera Dragonfly in Opera 9.5 beta 2 you can select Tools Advanced Developer Tools. On Mac we've found a bug whereby OS X's video memory gets corrupted, causing a crash. To avoid this you should use the new build available at http://snapshot.opera.com/mac/o950s_4808.dmg , which works around this problem. We'd very much appreciate your feedback on Opera Dragonfly, to make sure it fits the needs of the developer community. If you find time to test and use Opera Dragonfly, feel free to contact me with your suggestions, feature requests and bug reports. We really hope that it helps you when debugging issues in Opera, even at this early stage. Thanks, David Storey Chief Web Opener | Product Manager Web Standards | Product Manager Opera Dragonfly [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Full flash websites
I take the point of view that web pages are created to communicate with your audience. thats how I see it too, content is king I myself often have javascript and flash diasabled, so long as the content is available to the audience. 2008/5/6 Sven Dowideit [EMAIL PROTECTED]: yup, but then I take the point of view that web pages are created to communicate with your audience. If people like me are part of your audience, flash is pretty much unsuitable. That doesn't mean there aren't audiences for whom flash is the right answer, just that thought and analysis are needed to make sure your communication medium is appropriate to both your message and your audience. No different really from writing your web content in Latin :} sven kate wrote: because users like Sven disable it by default No disrespect to Sven but that must be the pits to take the very long learning curve: Create the Flash: Then along comes 'A Visitor' and disable all your hard work..*doh Kate http://jungaling.com/bichons/ http://jungaling.com/Malaysia/ http://simplyborneo.com/gardenforums/ http://jungaling.com/katesplace/ - Original Message - *From:* Sam Sherlock mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org mailto:wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Sent:* Tuesday, May 06, 2008 1:13 AM *Subject:* Re: [WSG] Full flash websites As many have already commented I apply caution when using flash (because of it creates extra work, because users like Sven disable it by default and much more besides) The thing is some clients care initially more for the visual appeal (things bouncing around etc) of websites and not for features that improve the accessibility or user experience overall. others have made points about ensuring content is available to all. In a lot of cases it is possible to display the same content in a no flash format (server side scripting helps a great deal - not writing script srcs or codeblocks to the page [setting this in a user setting session var]) I make use of swfObject to replace a summary of the content that the swf displays, often with links to further info of the extent of work produced by this can mushroom, and become unwieldy. admittedly this is much easier if the site is not full browser flash, but if the site is small and all the content is loaded in dynamically Flash can recreate (often poorly) things that are achieved with traditional html - deep linking And this is then an aspect of the site that must be cared for, increasing the overall complexity (and therefore potential err) - there if a lot to bear in mind here also there is shadowbox (by Michael Jackson [not the former jackson 5 pop sensation]) that does a real nice job in displaying all kinds of content lightbox (lokesh dhakar) style of the page - this is what Ben Buchanan was refering to I think - http://mjijackson.com/shadowbox/index.html - S 2008/5/6 Ben Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: What do you people, professionals and hobby standardists think about full flash websites?? where is the usability and accessibility for flash in general?? Accessibility and search engine visibility of Flash in most cases is zero. I've only heard of one Flash site that was considered accessible and it made a lot of news at the time! Flash only reliably works for users with no physical or technical barriers; and search engines can't read Flash in any useful manner. I generally don't like the usability aspects either - that's subjective I guess, but I've found Flash is generally used when someone thought HTML didn't make them look cool enough. Which means they wanted lots of stuff to bounce and flash and so on ;) Essentially you should only ever add a Flash layer over the top of XHTML; and give users the choice between the two. Flash isn't evil, but *only offering Flash* is evil. -ben ----- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [WSG] Colour accessibility/ usability
On 5/6/08, Linda Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I would just like to thank all those who have shared their experiences. There has been some very interesting feedback that has been mentioned and we are hoping to conduct a few tests and see how users feel with the colour scheme. I've used the colour contrast analyser before, and it does help a lot (although it does say and red and white are acceptable - but that's where automated tools can sometimes cause false positives). One more thing to consider: a fairly significant portion of the world's population cannot easily distinguish red from black in a run of text, meaning that links ought not to be only reddened but marked in some other manner. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protanomaly#Prevalence (Tip of the hat to Dean Allen http://textism.com/2008/05/04/on.not.seeing.red) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Full flash websites
I do think we also shouldn¹t forget that there are a lot of people out there who need to find a webpage attractive in order to make them stay and read the content. And some Flash(y) content can be useful/attractive. (Emphasis on can¹!) Some people (probably a lot) really like that sort of stuff ... :) - susie On 7/5/08 5:03 AM, Sam Sherlock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I take the point of view that web pages are created to communicate with your audience. thats how I see it too, content is king I myself often have javascript and flash diasabled, so long as the content is available to the audience. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Full flash websites
Using some unobstrusive js effects much the same (and or better) can be made without flash http://simonwillison.net/static/2008/xtech/ which advises making a standard site that functions with basic html and present it with css, and then add additional functionality not my own work but an example of the what I am talking about http://interiors.davroc.co.uk/ 2008/5/7 Susie Gardner-Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I do think we also shouldn't forget that there are a lot of people out there who need to find a webpage attractive in order to make them stay and read the content. And some Flash(y) content can be useful/attractive. (Emphasis on 'can'!) Some people (probably a lot) really like that sort of stuff ... :) - susie On 7/5/08 5:03 AM, Sam Sherlock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I take the point of view that web pages are created to communicate with your audience. thats how I see it too, content is king I myself often have javascript and flash diasabled, so long as the content is available to the audience. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Full flash websites
On 7/5/08 1:37 PM, Sam Sherlock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Using some unobstrusive js effects much the same (and or better) can be made without flash http://simonwillison.net/static/2008/xtech/ which advises making a standard site that functions with basic html and present it with css, and then add additional functionality not my own work but an example of the what I am talking about http://interiors.davroc.co.uk/ That¹s a nice-looking site! I guess all I was trying to say is that Flash is here and developers will use it. I would never make a fully Flash website personally and I do think it¹s a bad idea. But an occasional little bit of Flash is another matter (imho), depending on the circumstances/requirements of the site and it¹s owner. Sometimes it sounds like people think it doesn¹t matter what a site looks like as long as it is accessible. But it does matter to the majority of people. I know that content is the ultimate thing, but if the site isn¹t presented in an attractive manner then a lot of (sighted) people won¹t stop to look. I personally would rarely bother looking at a site that had no styles and/or looked like a Word document or list or something. I don¹t think I¹m alone here! Most of us live in a visual world. So we want/expect/need to see attractive things. I am not for one second saying we shouldn¹t be making websites that are accessible and easy to use for everyone. But I don¹t see that this means that developers shouldn¹t use other technologies that may not be accessible to everyone, as long as the main content of the website is accessible by the users that the website is being developed for. I¹m going to stop before a hail of comments come my way! And I¹m going to try and refrain from extending this conversation ... grin - susie *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Full flash websites
kate wrote: No disrespect to Sven but that must be the pits to take the very long learning curve: Create the Flash: Then along comes 'A Visitor' and disable all your hard work..*doh Sorry? You're blaming A Visitor for not being able to obtain the information you are supposed to giving them? ::boggle:: [sigh] mark *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Full flash websites
Hi all I've yet to see a full flash website I liked - too often they use small fonts and poor contrast; navigation is quite often difficult. I understand that accessibility has been improved, but haven't really explored it (and of course just because the tools are now available doesn't mean that developers necessarily use them, any more than they do in HTML). It can be great for getting immediate feedback without reloading a page e.g. building a customised bag at Timbuk2: http://www.timbuk2.com/tb2/products/bagbuilder Elizabeth -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kate Sent: Tuesday, 6 May 2008 6:30 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Full flash websites Hi, A forum I used to go to uesd to say some HTML and Flash. Maybe this site helps a little bit: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20001029.html Or: http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200610/full_flash_websites_and_seo/ Kate http://jungaling.com/bichons/ http://jungaling.com/Malaysia/ http://jungaling.com/katesplace/ - Original Message - From: Michael Persson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 9:15 PM Subject: [WSG] Full flash websites The company I worl with has a big love for full flash websites and we have produced some very nice but heavy and slow ones. What do you people, professionals and hobby standardists think about full flash websites?? where is the usability and accessibility for flash in general?? I am personally and professionally against them as they cut of the usabiity, have bad accessibility and for me the navigation most often i very difficult and difficult to use. Michael Persson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1415 - Release Date: 05/05/2008 06:01 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Full flash websites
that timbuk2 is great. wholeheartedly agree about the small fonts and poor contrast though this is designers getting carried away with things, and pleasing their own egos often I get asked by clients to create a flash intro for a site, with cinematic ambitions they describe what they had in mind 'text slides in..', '...musical intro plays'- etc Sometimes it sounds like people think it doesn't matter what a site looks like as long as it is accessible. But it does matter to the majority of people. I know that content is the ultimate thing, but if the site isn't presented in an attractive manner then a lot of (sighted) people won't stop to look. I personally would rarely bother looking at a site that had no styles and/or looked like a Word document or list or something. I don't think I'm alone here! Most of us live in a visual world. So we want/expect/need to see attractive things. its about balance; and finding the right middle ground.This is project specific. I make every site with three groupings in mind 1. client 2. intended audience 3. maintainer of site (sometimes not me, sometimes client or employee of client using CMS) 2008/5/7 Elizabeth Spiegel [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi all I've yet to see a full flash website I liked - too often they use small fonts and poor contrast; navigation is quite often difficult. I understand that accessibility has been improved, but haven't really explored it (and of course just because the tools are now available doesn't mean that developers necessarily use them, any more than they do in HTML). It can be great for getting immediate feedback without reloading a page e.g. building a customised bag at Timbuk2: http://www.timbuk2.com/tb2/products/bagbuilder Elizabeth -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kate Sent: Tuesday, 6 May 2008 6:30 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Full flash websites Hi, A forum I used to go to uesd to say some HTML and Flash. Maybe this site helps a little bit: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20001029.html Or: http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200610/full_flash_websites_and_seo/ Kate http://jungaling.com/bichons/ http://jungaling.com/Malaysia/ http://jungaling.com/katesplace/ - Original Message - From: Michael Persson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 9:15 PM Subject: [WSG] Full flash websites The company I worl with has a big love for full flash websites and we have produced some very nice but heavy and slow ones. What do you people, professionals and hobby standardists think about full flash websites?? where is the usability and accessibility for flash in general?? I am personally and professionally against them as they cut of the usabiity, have bad accessibility and for me the navigation most often i very difficult and difficult to use. Michael Persson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.8/1415 - Release Date: 05/05/2008 06:01 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
